From the American Revolution to the 13th Amendment, the institution of slavery has been a major issue in the United States. Many individuals and groups fought relentlessly against slavery, speaking out about the evils of slavery and what threats it poses to the preservation of the Union. The government also attempted to deal with slavery, but not all attempts were successful. Since slaves were the backbone of the South’s economy, compromise on slavery was very difficult. This is a result of southern representatives in the federal government fighting very persistently against abolitionists. The continual debate over the institution of slavery, part of the debate over states’ rights versus the federal government’s power, was one of the factors …show more content…
Several compromises were made over the issue of slavery between the Three-Fifths Compromise in the Constitution and the Civil War. Most of these compromises were made in the hope of avoiding a civil war between the North and the South, but they just prolonged the inevitable battle. The Missouri Compromise was one of the first federal laws that focused solely on slavery, including the balance of slave and free states in the federal government. When Missouri applied for statehood in 1817, there was a balance in the Senate of 11 slave states and 11 free states. Debate broke out in Congress, owing to the fact that if Missouri was added as a free state or slave state, it would tip the balance towards that side with two more votes in the Senate. In the midst of the debate, Maine had also requested admittance to the Union. In the Missouri Compromise, both Missouri and Maine were admitted to the Union, with Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, preserving the balance of free and slave states. In 1854, the issue of slavery in the newly created Nebraska and Kansas territories was altered to be decided by popular sovereignty (doc. 2). This was in part because the Supreme Court case Dred Scott v. Sandford, lasting from 1847-1857, had declared that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional (doc. 3). This meant that the issue of slavery in these territories was now to be decided by popular vote within those territories. This led to “Border Ruffians”, proslavery supporters, and antislavery groups traveling into Kansas in hope of affecting the outcome of the vote. These forces battled each other in Kansas in a “mini” civil war, giving the territory the nickname “Bleeding
It can be argued that the Missouri Compromise not only put off the start of the Civil War, but was also a cause. Many contributing factors led up to the Civil War in the years following the passing after the Missouri Compromise. Years after the Missouri Compromise went into effect, Congress passed the Tariff Act of 1833, sometimes called the Compromise Tariff. This was proposed by Henry Clay, and called for the gradual reduction of tariffs, ending the Nullification Crisis. In 1846, United States’ President James Polk requested 2 million dollars to purchase land from Mexico following the Mexican-American War.
In the era before the Civil War America was expanding westward. The Louisiana Purchase and other lands gained help to give America new land to expand on, but this leaded to issues with the division of free and slave states. As Missouri became a state they wanted to become a slave state, which caused trouble. In order to keep equilibrium between the states, Congress came up with the Missouri Compromise of 1820.The Missouri Compromise made Missouri a slave state and Maine a free state. The Treaty also made a line within the Louisiana Territory to keep slavery from moving up the
During the Federal Convention the importance was on getting all thirteen states to join the union and therefore compromising played a big role. As a Mr. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut points out that “the morality or wisdom of slavery are considerations belonging to the states themselves”. There were a few that did oppose slavery thinking that it would “bring the judgment of Heaven on a country” and believed that the federal government did have the right to regulate slave trade. With such division in their thoughts and views of slavery plus the trade of them Mr. Roger Sherman “observed that the abolition of slavery seemed to be going on in the United States, and that the good sense of the several states would probably by degrees complete it”. In the long run, men that were against slavery thought it was more important for the thirteen colonies to come together than the abolishment of slavery knowing that it will come to extinction in the long
The Missouri Compromise was made as an attempt to deal with the debate that had been going on about slavery. It lasted thirty-four years, but never truly made the North orouth totally happy with the situation. Although the Missouri Compromise did push back the debate on slavery in Missouri, it did not solve the problem as a whole. The tension between the North and South was, in fact reduced for a period of time. Once the Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional, the tension once again grew.
The United States Constitution, which shows law, rule and power, was ratified in 1787. In this professional document there have mention one important concept that is slave. However it did not completely resolve the slavery issue. In the flowing paragraphs, I will explain the ways in which the Constitution did and did not respond slavery and give the answer about in the Constitution why did the founding fathers not outlaw slavery completely.
One of the first stumbling blocks was how small states would be represented. The Compromise worked out was for the House of Representatives to be based upon population and the Senate to be equal among the states. This was very important because it would both affect the number of electoral votes and taxes paid to the federal government. With so many slaves in the South, the issue was, “should slaves be counted?” It was agreed upon that that slaves would be counted as three-fifths a person for both representation and taxation and clarifies adding whole numbers of free persons and three-fifths of all other persons.
From the time of the American Revolution in 1776, to the year 1852, there has been many causes to the opposition to slavery. Some have shown the support for increased opposition while others have shown to not support this opposition. This has caused many disputes about who is in the right. There is plenty of evidence between the two groups which were either supporting the opposition to slavery or they were not supporting the opposition. Three causes exist in support of and against this opposition: Social Darwinism, increased tolerance, and the need to unite the nation.
The main reason why the Framers didn’t succeed in their final compromise is because it was too difficult to make all the delegates (who were basically competing) agree with each other, so numerous issues were ignored and most plans were severely compromised. An example of this is the debate between larger and smaller states over their representation in the newly proposed Senate. Two solutions were significantly favored: the New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan. The smaller states were in favor of the New Jersey Plan, which would enforce each state to send the same number of representatives to Congress. The larger states supported the Virginia Plan, which called for each state to have a different number of representatives based on the state’s population.
One of the compromises made in the Constitutional Convention is the three-fifths compromise. In this compromise, the southerners wanted to add slaves to the population of the state they lived in. If slaves were included in their state’s population, that state would be able to add more representatives in the House of Representatives. Northerners did not agree with that statement because slaves did not have the right to vote. After the delegates compromised, they agreed that only three-fifths of the slave’s population would be counted into the state’s population.
Due to the fact that the South had more of an agricultural economy, the Southerners thought that the states should have the right to decide whether residents could own slaves, rather than the federal government. In 1846 a congressman from Pennsylvania named David Wilmot introduced a bill to the House of Representatives called the Wilmot Proviso. This said slavery would not be allowed in any western territory acquired from Mexico. Of course most of the politicians from the North loved the idea, while the politicians from the South did not. The Missouri Compromise on March 3, 1820 (also called the Compromise of 1820) was the first major legislative compromise that was passed to draw a line between slave and free territory.
Yet, slavery was a huge issue that was not talked about much in the Constitution as each state still seemed very independent at this point, but now slavery was playing a key role in the representation of the congressmen and women. The Northern states believed that slaves should not count towards representation of the states as they were considered “property” of their plantation owners. The south disagreed, and the ⅗ Compromise was formed
Congress and across the country. They reached a boiling point after Missouri’s 1819 request for admission to the Union as a slave state or a free state, which threatened to upset the balance between slave states and free states. To keep the peace, Congress orchestrated a two-part compromise, granting Missouri’s request but also admitting Maine as a free state. It also passed an amendment that drew an imaginary line across the former Louisiana Territory, establishing a boundary between free and slave regions that remained the law of the land until it was negated by the Kansas. The north’s reaction towards the MIssouri Compromise was that they condemned it for acquiescing in the expansion of
Our nation contemporarily hails the Constitution as a protector of the people’s rights — but we often fail to remember that it accomplished grand measures to secure the system of slavery. The year of 1787, when the Constitution was signed, was a year of great tension among members of American society. Vast numbers of people were in support of slavery, and many of its opposers were afraid to speak up about their beliefs. The Constitution attempted to retain a neutral position on the issue, but it ultimately failed by instituting safeguards against the freedom or equal recognition of slaves as members of America.
The issue the compromise was about was whether there should be slavery in the western territories. Maine wanted to be added to the Union, however, slavery was banned there. If Maine were to be added to the Union, it would upset the balance between free and slave states in the nation and the Senate. So, the Missouri Compromise, proposed by Senator Henry Clay, allowed Maine to enter the Union as a free state, and allowed Missouri to be entered into the Union as a slave state.
In retrospect, the history of the antebellum America is quite fascinating. During this period, the young republic faced several challenges. One of the most serious ones was the slavery issue. Reading the related materials, people might understand that the Founding Fathers had actually pondered about the solution to the issue; however, they did not pursue it because they foresaw possible turmoil in American politics. Unfortunately, the issue kept simmering until it reached the boiling point which resulted in the disastrous Civil War.